An examination of the use of angling data to estimate total returns of Atlantic salmon, <i>Salmo salar</i>, to two rivers in Newfoundland, Canada
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Conservation spawning requirements (limits) for Atlantic salmon, Salmo salar L., have been developed for a number of rivers in Newfoundland. Status of stocks is evaluated against these limits and scientific advice and recommendations on levels of recreational catch provided to resource managers. A critical factor in this process is the determination of total returns. This has been accomplished for 30–40% of the rivers in question over the years through the use of fish counting fences and traps installed in fishways. In Newfoundland, it is not logistically or financially possible to operate fish counting facilities in all of the approximately 200 Atlantic salmon rivers. Thus angling catch data have been used as an alternative means of estimating total returns to rivers without counting facilities. Estimates of total returns were three to four times higher than the actual values for one of the two rivers studied and deviated from the actual by as much as 60% for the other. Management implications of the approach are discussed.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".